[Advaita-l] In Advaita alone the jiva is not jaDa

[V Subrahmanian]

In Advaita alone the jiva is not jaDa

In the Kenopanishad there is the opening question:  Impelled by what does
the mind, prana, sense organs function in their respective fields.?

केनेषितं पतति प्रेषितं मनः केन प्राणः प्रथमः प्रैति युक्तः ।
केनेषितां वाचमिमां वदन्ति चक्षुःश्रोत्रं क उ देवो युनक्ति ॥ १ ॥

The disciple asked: Om. By whose will directed does the mind proceed to its
object? At whose command does the prana, the foremost, do its duty? At
whose will do men utter speech? Who is the god that directs the eyes and
ears?

And in reply it is said:

श्रोत्रस्य श्रोत्रं मनसो मनो यद्वाचो ह वाचं स उ प्राणस्य प्राणः ।
चक्षुषश्चक्षुरतिमुच्य धीराः प्रेत्यास्माल्लोकादमृता भवन्ति ॥ २ ॥

 The teacher replied: It is the Ear of the ear, the Mind of the mind, the
Speech of speech, the Life of life and the Eye of the eye. Having detached
the Self from the sense-organs and renounced the world, the Wise attain to
Immortality.

And further:

यद्वाचानभ्युदितं येन वागभ्युद्यते ।
तदेव ब्रह्म त्वं विद्धि नेदं यदिदमुपासते ॥ ५ ॥

5     That which cannot be expressed by speech, but by which speech is
expressed-That alone know as Brahman and not that which people here
worship.

For the above mantra, Shankara concludes the bhashyam thus:

नेदं ब्रह्म यदिदम् इत्युपाधिभेदविशिष्टमनात्मेश्वरादि उपासते ध्यायन्ति ।
तदेव ब्रह्म त्वं विद्धि इत्युक्तेऽपि नेदं ब्रह्म इत्यनात्मनोऽब्रह्मत्वं
पुनरुच्यते नियमार्थम् अन्यब्रह्मबुद्धिपरिसङ्ख्यानार्थं वा ॥  That is not
Brahman which people meditate upon as 'this', which is characterized by a
differentiating upadhi, which is anatma, not-self, that is Ishvara, etc.
You have to know that alone as Brahman which is not of the above
description.  In other words, if something is known as 'this', that is
anatma, abrahma. The Upanishad wants to preclude the aspirant from
realizing something that is not his own self.


From the above we see that the Upanisahad is teaching that the power that
impels the mind, prana, sense organs, etc. is Consciousness and the ones
that are impelled are inert entities.  The teaching culminates in
emphasizing that it is this impelling consiciousness that one should
realize oneself to be, as Brahman, and not that which is a-brahman and
an-atman.

A look at the Antaryami Brahmanam of Br.Up. 3.7.3 too gives us the same
conclusion:
यः पृथिव्यां तिष्ठन्पृथिव्या अन्तरो यं पृथिवी न वेद यस्य पृथिवी शरीरं यः
पृथिवीमन्तरो यमयत्येष त आत्मान्तर्याम्यमृतः ॥ ३ ॥   mantra.  Bhashya:

देवताकार्यकरणस्य ईश्वरसाक्षिमात्रसान्निध्येन हि नियमेन प्रवृत्तिनिवृत्ती
स्याताम् ; य ईदृगीश्वरो नारायणाख्यः, पृथिवीं पृथिवीदेवताम् , यमयति नियमयति
स्वव्यापारे, अन्तरः अभ्यन्तरस्तिष्ठन् , एष त आत्मा, ते तव, मम च सर्वभूतानां
च इत्युपलक्षणार्थमेतत् , अन्तर्यामी यस्त्वया पृष्टः, अमृतः
सर्वसंसारधर्मवर्जित इत्येतत् ॥

The 'antaryami' is the consciousness that impels the 'body-mind' complex of
the devataa.  This impelling consciousness is taught as the Atma of the
aspirant. From the Kenopanishad we understand that one should not realize
oneself as the 'Narayana' who is different from oneself but only that which
is the Atman.  [Therefore, this 'Narayana' is impelling merely by the
presence as witness and therefore is not any deity.]

Thus, the impelling Consciousness is the Atman, the true nature of the jiva
and that which is impelled is only the anatman consisting of the body,
mind, sense organs. Even when the Br.up. mantra says
यः पृथिवीमन्तरो यमयति, it is only the body-mind-senses of Prthvi devataa
that is being impelled. The impelling consciousness is the jiva divested of
the body-mind-senses complex. Thus the jiva is pure chaitanyam without any
tinge of anatma.

On a perusal of the commentary of Madhva for the Kenopanishad mantra we
find that the impeller is the 'niyamaka' of the jiva, devatas, etc.

Madhva parsed the word upaasate into three words :-)   upa aasa te:
(someone who is sitting close to you) [see the second line in the bhashya].

His bhashya:
https://srimadhvyasa.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/02-san-talavakaraupanishadbhashyam-27112017.pdf

नेदं जीवस्वरूपं यद् ब्रह्म  विष्ण्वाख्यमव्ययम् |
* किन्तु यत् ते समीपस्थमास ते विनियामकम्* |   [upa has the meaning of
sameepe.  Madhva takes the one word upaasate, a verb, as three different
words: upa aasa te]

[That which is the immutable named Vishnu is not the svarupa of the jiva.
On the other hand that which is your (jiva's) niyamaka, impeller,
regulator, controller, who sits near you.]

तदेव ब्रह्म त्वं विद्धि विष्ण्वाख्यं परमव्ययम् |
नियामकं तद्देवानां मर्त्यानां किमुतोत्तमम् ||

[That alone you realize as Brahman which is called Vishnu, the immutable
supreme.  That is the controller of the devas and others and there is none
other higher than that.]

We see that Madhva specifies that the impeller is the controller of the
jiva.  We get the impression that the jiva is impelled, like the inert
mind, prana, sense organs, etc. That means the jiva in such a construct is
not something that is completely divested of the not-self, anatma, that is
called kshetram in the BG 13th chapter:

महाभूतान्यहङ्कारो बुद्धिरव्यक्तमेव च।
इन्द्रियाणि दशैकं च पञ्च चेन्द्रियगोचराः।।13.6।।
The great elements, egoism, intellect and the Unmanifest itself; the ten
organs and the one, and the five objects of the senses;
इच्छा द्वेषः सुखं दुःखं सङ्घातश्चेतनाधृतिः।
एतत्क्षेत्रं समासेन सविकारमुदाहृतम्।।13.7।।
Desire, repulsion, happiness, sorrow, the aggregate (of body and organs),
sentience, fortitude- this field, together with its modifications, has been
spoken of briefly.

Nowhere in the Upanishads and the Bhagavadgita we have a situation where
the jiva, having discriminated the inert kshetra, not-self, from the
kshetrajna, the sentient self, is still something who is not just pure
consciousness, prakriti sambandha rahita atma.  If such a jiva is not just
pure consciousness, then it is evident that the kshetra amsha has not been
completely separated from the jiva. This is because, any possibility of
knowing an entity, objects, enjoying, experiencing, etc. will have to be
only with a set of mind, sense and motor organs. If such a mind-body-organs
complex is going to be an inseparable part of the jiva even in liberation,
then such a jiva cannot be free from jaDatva.  The Upanishads do not teach
a bhoga-vishishta mukti. Bhoga can happen only within the realm of the
fourteen lokas which are bhautika.  Abhautika loka with bhoga is not the
teaching of the Upanishads.

In a nutshell, niyamana by chaitanya is required only for jaDa, the
niyamya.  If jiva is said to be really niyamya, then the message is: the
jiva is jaDa. Shankara alone has emphatically said that the niyaamaka
chaitanya does the niyamana of only the jaDa manas, indriyas, etc. and the
jaDa rahita jiva is nothing but the niyaamaka chaitanya as per the
Kenopanishad and the antaryami brahmana of the Brihadaranyaka. If anyone
says the jiva is different from the niyamaka then it is inevitable that the
jiva is jaDa.

Om Tat Sat